72 percent have ‘less favorable’ view of Street
September 26th, 2007, 12:13 pm · 3 Comments · posted by PEGGY LOWE
Just walked back from Nick Berardino’s office where the union boss released a poll he commissioned about Treasurer-Tax Collector Chriss Street.
Of the 512 registered OC voters polled between Sept. 13-18, 72 percent said they have a “less favorable” opinion of Street because of the many federal and local investigations into his past and present work. Some five percent said they see him as “more favorable.”
The poll also singles out the Board of Supes, with 49 percent saying they have a “less favorable” opinion of the panel because it postponed any action against Street, including failing to strip Street of his investment powers. Twenty-one percent saw the board’s lack of action as “more favorable.”
“People are very concerned about the actions of Chriss Street and what that means in terms of what the board should be doing,” said Doug Herman of The Strategy Group, a Democratic firm based in Pasadena.
– Peggy Lowe
The poll was done by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percent.
The poll also found that 58 percent of respondents supported removing fiscal responsibilities — such as purchasing and contracting — from Street while 31 percent opposed it. The same figure, 58 percent, supported removing Street’s investment powers while 31 opposed that.
Calling Street and the supes for reaction now and will be posting a web story soon.
– Peggy Lowe



. . .
Instant polls of various OC constituencies









September 26th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
[…] 72 percent have ‘less favorable’ view of Street […]
September 26th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
The poll was nothing less than a negative smear campaign. I was called and questioned as part of the survey. The questions were slanted so bad it was hard not to think whoever they were going after wasn’t guilty of everything but Watergate. Personally, I had no plus or minus feeling about Street - reading only what the Register had previously reported. After the hit campaign from the survey (and now I find out it was “arranged” by the union), I’m pretty upset that the union bosses are using their money and power to damage another elected official who doesn’t do things their way. They must be pretty concerned about him — and it’s not because of general public welfare.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Tustin Guy can you confirm the questions were asked are those posted?